Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fatal dog attacks in the United States (2014)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. RL0919 (talk) 09:38, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of fatal dog attacks in the United States (2014)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A lot of people die from external causes every year, and these deaths are often reported in local or regional newspapers, whether they are dog attacks, house fires, car accidents, tornadoes, ... It is not clear why the dog attacks in one country in one year would warrant a separate list. It's obviously not a rare occurrence. It's verifiable (though no indication if it is in any way complete), but that doesn't make it a notable list topic. Fram (talk) 09:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Animal, and United States of America. Fram (talk) 09:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated: List of fatal dog attacks in the United States (2010s)

The 2014 list was split of from the 2010s list, but the same reasoning applies. This sadly happens all the time, and usually gets only local, shortlived attention, just because it is relatively commonplace and because people die from all kinds of accidents all the time. Fram (talk) 09:04, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated:

List of fatal dog attacks in the United States (before 2000)
List of fatal dog attacks in the United States (2000s)

I have not nominated List of fatal dog attacks in the United States, because that page has more context, and an article about Fatal dog attacks in the United States could well be encyclopedic (with perhaps a short list of truly notable attacks, e.g. ones that lead to a change in laws or ones involving notable people). The reasoning for the deletion of the above four lists also applies to the lists on that page for 2020, 2021 and 2022 of course, but is outside the scope of this AfD. Fram (talk) 09:10, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This is a premature nomination as there has been no discussion on the article's talk page and no attempt to improve it so it is more acceptable. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 09:58, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't believe it to be improvable to an acceptable state, hence the deletion nomination. There is nothing premature about this. There is no requirement to first discuss things on an article talk page before it may get nominated for deletion either. Fram (talk) 10:11, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no issue with deleting these articles, as long as their content is not merged. The 2014 list was especially large, and was the first to be separated from an even larger list pertaining to the 2010s, which is far too large to be a tenable article. Onetwothreeip (talk) 10:00, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The concept of death by dog attack is definitely encyclopaedic, but to list individual deaths isn't, except for those few that become causes célèbres and influence the entire subject (which cases will have sustained coverage). A good article on death by dog attack will be supported by secondary sources discussing the concept. The list is essentially a collection of incidents supported by sources that the writer of a desirable secondary source might consider his/her primary data. Technically, a newspaper article about someone getting killed by a dog is an independent secondary source, but from the perspective of the subject of dangerous dogs, it's primary data, and listing/categorising these becomes almost original research and databasing. Elemimele (talk) 12:44, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete These are tragic but unfortunately not uncommon. Millions of people die in various accidents, and it's not our place to catalogue them from routine local news. The tables in the main list should also be deleted and that page converted into an article. The other animal lists are also questionable, but much more rare with incidents more likely to receive national coverage. Reywas92^Talk 13:59, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. WP:NLIST is the guideline, I quote the relevant parts Notability guidelines also apply to the creation of stand-alone lists and tables. Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. I think therefore to prove it should be kept we need to show independent sources deal with the topic, even if they don't include all items on the list. I think it meets the criteria due to:

SACKS, J. J. et al. Fatal dog attacks, 1989-1994. Pediatrics, [s. l.], v. 97, n. 6, p. 891, 1996. Disponível em: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.18429256&site=eds-live&scope=site. Acesso em: 15 jun. 2022.
W. VAN DE VOORDE; K. DE MUNNYNCK. Forensic approach of fatal dog attacks: a case report and literature review. International Journal of Legal Medicine, [s. l.], v. 116, p. 295–300, 2019. Disponível em: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsair&AN=edsair.doi...........4bd4d840388ae24954fafef0d7313fd5&site=eds-live&scope=site. Acesso em: 15 jun. 2022.

I think separating by year and decade is arguable either way, but I understand the separation. I don't have a strong opinion on merging them. CT55555 (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- The same kind of sources can easily be found for car crashes. Would that mean that a list of car crashes by year and country is acceptable? Again, I am not arguing that the topic of fatal dog attacks in the US isn't notable, it obviously is, and these would be good sources to use in such an article. But I don't see how having a list of in themselves no notable events halps in any way (it's not like e.g. a list of sports matches, where the matches are what constitutes the season and define the outcome: here the list is just a list of random examples). Fram (talk) 07:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  Influenced by the essay WP:WHATABOUT, I'll avoid the question about car crashes. CT55555 (talk) 11:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:NOTNEWS. Dogs kill people fairly frequently, so do other things. This isn’t a remarkable enough event to make huge lists of. Dronebogus (talk) 13:30, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:NOTDATABASE. List of fatal dog attacks in the United States should be sufficient in some form, rather than by year, or even decade. -Kj cheetham (talk) 20:44, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.